Assisted suicide effort continues

Thursday

Nov 8, 2012 at 6:00 AMNov 8, 2012 at 8:54 PM

By Bronislaus B. Kush TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF

Advocates of the controversial state ballot initiative that would have allowed terminally ill patients to end their lives with legally prescribed drugs said they will continue their fight, but because of Massachusetts law, proponents won’t be able to get another question before voters until 2018.

“It’s too early to tell what our strategy might be, but yesterday’s (Tuesday’s) vote on the issue was only the beginning of the conversation about physician-assisted suicide in Massachusetts,” said Stephen Crawford, a spokesman for Dignity 2012, the main advocacy group for Question 2.

The initiative failed 51 percent to 49 percent. About 3 million ballots were cast.

A poll in September showed overwhelming support for the measure, but that enthusiasm dwindled as church groups, pro-life organizations, and conservatives aggressively stepped up their attacks.

“We’re very happy with the outcome,” said Raymond L Delisle, spokesman for the Diocese of Worcester. “At one point, the polling showed we were losing by 20 to 30 points.”

If passed, the measure — modeled on an initiative passed in Oregon about 15 years ago — would have allowed people with six months to live and no reasonable chance of recuperating to obtain medication from a physician to end their lives. Two doctors would have to sign off on the request and the lethal dose would be administered by the patient.

Washington state voters also approved a physician-assisted suicide ballot question. Similar measures have failed in Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire.

Mr. Crawford said the initial response to the measure was very positive until opponent groups began to spread what he said were lies and misconceptions about the issue. He said the Roman Catholic Church in Massachusetts was particularly aggressive in opposing the initiative.

For example, Mr. Crawford, citing financial reports filed with the state, said that the Archdiocese of Boston and some of its affiliated organizations, such as the Boston Catholic Television Center and St. John’s Seminary, spent at least $2.5 million to defeat the proposed law.

He added that the American Principles Project, a national conservative organization, along with one of its founders, added another $500,000 to oppose the initiative.

“That’s a lot of money,” said Mr. Crawford, noting his organization spent about $600,000 to advocate for the question.

Both sides admitted the Massachusetts vote was important, given that approval would likely spawn efforts in other states.

According to Brian McNiff, a spokesman for Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin, another similarly worded ballot question cannot be placed before voters until two biennial election cycles have passed.

However, advocates could push their cause with the state Legislature, though two proposed bills filed in the past died in committee.

Mr. Crawford said that 65 to 70 people annually use physician-assisted suicide in Washington and Oregon. He added that about 100 people in each of those states legally obtain prescriptions to end their lives every year, but never use the drugs.

Meanwhile, opponents said they were pleased with the outcome.

“It is with a deep sense of thanksgiving to God that I have learned that Question 2 was voted down by the people of Massachusetts,” said Worcester Bishop Robert J. McManus. “It is important, however, that we do not see this as the end of a road, but a new beginning to focus on needed palliative and hospice services for the dying so that they are cared for in a dignified way until the time of natural death.”

A number of medical groups also came out in opposition, including the Massachusetts Medical Society.

“In response to the apparent defeat of ballot Question 2, we are pleased that the majority of voters agree that a physician’s role is to heal and comfort, not to aid in death,” said Dr. Richard Aghababian, the MMS’s president. “We reaffirm our commitment to provide physicians treating terminally ill patients all the resources necessary to enable them to contribute to the comfort and dignity of the patient and the patient’s family.”

In Central Massachusetts, 45 out of 66 communities voted against the measure. In Worcester, 175,910 were in favor and 206,480 were opposed.